A U.S. federal appeals court appeared skeptical on Sunday October 25, of a lawsuit filed by President Donald Trump’s administration that seeks to force California officials to set aside thousands of mail-in ballots the administration says were sent to noncitizens ahead of midterm elections.
As reported appeals court expressed deep skepticism toward a Trump administration lawsuit seeking to force California to segregate and withhold roughly 20,000 mail-in ballots.
During sharp questioning from a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, judges scrutinized whether the federal emergency injunction clashes directly with states’ constitutional authority under the Elections Clause.
Judicial Scrutiny:
As reported by Reuters, the high-profile legal battle forms part of a broader federal push regarding election oversight ahead of tight midterm congressional races.
The administration has taken an increasingly aggressive approach to election oversight, pressing states for voter-registration data and arguing that stricter measures are needed to ensure public confidence in the vote.
Critics including Democratic and some Republican election officials, view the moves as federal overreach.
Bennett, a Trump-appointed judge, said during Sunday’s oral argument that the lawsuit could not be reconciled with a provision of the US Constitution known as the Elections Clause, which gives states the authority to set election processes.
“It seems to me that you want us to issue an injunction that is entirely inconsistent with the law that the California legislature has adopted pursuant to the Elections Clause,” Bennett told Justice Department attorney Matthew Donnelly. “How can we do that?”
State attorneys and local officials pushed back fiercely, calling the emergency motion an unprecedented disruption that risks disenfranchising legitimate voters.
